US Highways that AASHTO probably want to murder

[agentsteel53]

National Highway System (NHS)

now that's a relic of road geekery if I ever saw one.  Most travelers can point out an interstate highway.  Some even know the difference between the interstate and US route systems.  Show me a single traveler that has ever heard of the NHS.

[usends]

If the USH system is really going to be anything beyond a relic of the past, it really should be used on routes that are secondary routes that are significant, but do not wholly require interstate status... 

...which, IMO, fits the non-Interstate part of the National Highway System (NHS) to a T.  I've mentioned as much on my website...

I like your concept of synching the US highway system with the NHS.  How does one find out which non-interstate roads are NHS?  Is there some kind of mapping application that helps to visualize what's included in the system?

[agentsteel53]

I like your concept of synching the US highway system with the NHS.  How does one find out which non-interstate roads are NHS?  Is there some kind of mapping application that helps to visualize what's included in the system?

the fact that it's this difficult and requires this much research just to track down a map of the NHS completely reinforces the notion that nobody cares about it, and therefore using it as any sort of useful system is an exercise in futility.

I have been a user of the American road network since the mid-90s and have logged many hundreds of thousands of miles, and the total quantity of times I have read about the NHS, thought about the NHS, used the NHS as a navigational aid, or even acknowledged that NHS existed is ... approximately zero.

[froggie]

How does one find out which non-interstate roads are NHS?  Is there some kind of mapping application that helps to visualize what's included in the system?

There is...

the fact that it's this difficult and requires this much research just to track down a map of the NHS completely reinforces the notion that nobody cares about it, and therefore using it as any sort of useful system is an exercise in futility.

That's in no small part because the layman doesn't care about road funding sources.  They just want their road project.

Meanwhile, your continual rants and complaints against the NHS would easily be rectified by my proposal.  Combining the NHS and the US route system into one entity both gives it an identifiable route marker (the US route shield), and a dedicated funding sources (FHWA NHS funds).

[TheStranger]

That's in no small part because the layman doesn't care about road funding sources. 

Thinking on a purely navigational basis, this is where I wish signage wasn't simply tied to funding sources, California in particular suffers from confusing route truncations as a result of this.  (This also comes into play elsewhere into the discussion about why some substandard interstate routes get the red-white-and-blue shield, while others are forced to lose their designations.)

[agentsteel53]

Meanwhile, your continual rants and complaints against the NHS would easily be rectified by my proposal.  Combining the NHS and the US route system into one entity both gives it an identifiable route marker (the US route shield), and a dedicated funding sources (FHWA NHS funds).

and then we'd get things like C-470/E-470/anything but I-470 for that perfectly cromulent Denver beltway... or, as Chris mentioned, just plain old gaps in numbering because a road built to US highway standards was - horrors! - not in the NHS funding system.

[TheStranger]

and then we'd get things like C-470/E-470/anything but I-470 for that perfectly cromulent Denver beltway... or, as Chris mentioned, just plain old gaps in numbering because a road built to US highway standards was - horrors! - not in the NHS funding system.

I think the only time a route gap could even be considered acceptable is if the route in question is on different sides of the continental divide (i.e. the repeated east-west interstates, US 2) - but really, if a route exists along a pathway, simply sign it, or decomission it with no seperate unconnected segments.

Not quite as macro as the NHS/US highway example, but California's handling of Route 1 and Route 160 fits into this paradigm, as does the move of all US routes in Indianapolis to I-465.

[Bickendan]

National Highway System (NHS)

now that's a relic of road geekery if I ever saw one.  Most travelers can point out an interstate highway.  Some even know the difference between the interstate and US route systems.  Show me a single traveler that has ever heard of the NHS.

I have -- When Gresham wanted to build a parkway (freeway) from I-84 to the Mt Hood Freeway along 238th Ave, they noted that this was the NHS corridor. Troutdale, Fairview and Wood Village all NIMBY'ed the project and got Metro to nerf the project.

It took me a while to suss out the NHS corridors from there, but they're essentially the red routes on most paper maps (DOT and RMN are the two big ones, IIRC -- Thomas Bros. doesn't give a hoot about these), while black routes are non-NHS.

[agentsteel53]

I have -- When Gresham wanted to build a parkway (freeway) from I-84 to the Mt Hood Freeway along 238th Ave, they noted that this was the NHS corridor. Troutdale, Fairview and Wood Village all NIMBY'ed the project and got Metro to nerf the project.

you and the city of Gresham are not average travelers!  Again, show me an average traveler, with little interest in roads beyond the fact that they will get him to point B, who has heard of the NHS.

[Bickendan]

I should have mentioned, it was the Oregonian that noted the corridor was NHS, so presumably, every person that read the paper that day will have heard of it -- not that they'll have any working knowledge what it is or what it means.

[flowmotion]

It's not law, per se.  More like policy.  Meanwhile, as was mentioned before, AASHTO can't go about proposing these changes.  The changes have to come from the respective state DOTs.  Thus, when it comes to the US routes, AASHTO is reactionary not by choice but by requirement.

While is true that AASHTO can't force states to do anything, I don't believe they have done a very good job promoting "best practices" for US Route signage. Leaving the decisions up to the locals with no guidance has lead to a highway system with very inconsistent standards for what is an 'acceptable' route.

Re the NHS: it looks you are suggesting that it be used to modify and extend the US route system, which seems like a good idea to me. AgentSteel is also correct that roads should not signed based on the funding program, but AFAICT nobody is suggesting that.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

I like your concept of synching the US highway system with the NHS.  How does one find out which non-interstate roads are NHS?  Is there some kind of mapping application that helps to visualize what's included in the system?

the fact that it's this difficult and requires this much research just to track down a map of the NHS completely reinforces the notion that nobody cares about it, and therefore using it as any sort of useful system is an exercise in futility.

I have been a user of the American road network since the mid-90s and have logged many hundreds of thousands of miles, and the total quantity of times I have read about the NHS, thought about the NHS, used the NHS as a navigational aid, or even acknowledged that NHS existed is ... approximately zero.

So if anything before 1995 is a relic, what does that make 99% of the people who post here (we have what, 2 posters born after 1995?)?
Otherwise, go visit your own website Jake.
https://www.aaroads.com/high-priority/index.html

[agentsteel53]

Otherwise, go visit your own website Jake.

http://shields.aaroads.com

you go visit it, then 

[Scott5114]

National Highway System (NHS)

now that's a relic of road geekery if I ever saw one.  Most travelers can point out an interstate highway.  Some even know the difference between the interstate and US route systems.  Show me a single traveler that has ever heard of the NHS.

I just looked up the NHS map of Oklahoma to find that it includes the Chickasaw Turnpike.

...What the hell, FHWA.

[J N Winkler]

The NHS is a funny system.  It includes not just important through routes which are specialized to serve long-distance traffic, but also what are called "intermodal connectors."  I think a straightforward NHS-to-US highway mapping would run into problems with the intermodal connectors, some of which would have to receive spur designations.  The Interstate numbering system is set up to handle this better than the US highway numbering system, so a map of NHS onto the union of Interstates and US routes would probably work well.  (Froggie--I see your proposal addresses the intermodal connectors by assigning unsigned four-digit US route designations to them, but this does nothing to establish a transparent link between US highways and the NHS and in general I believe four-digit US routes should be avoided like the plague.)

Of course, there are a fair few NHS routes which are state routes.  This would give a whole new dimension to the "I want my favorite state route to be an Interstate" debate.

[WillWeaverRVA]

The NHS is a funny system.  It includes not just important through routes which are specialized to serve long-distance traffic, but also what are called "intermodal connectors."  I think a straightforward NHS-to-US highway mapping would run into problems with the intermodal connectors, some of which would have to receive spur designations.  The Interstate numbering system is set up to handle this better than the US highway numbering system, so a map of NHS onto the union of Interstates and US routes would probably work well.  (Froggie--I see your proposal addresses the intermodal connectors by assigning unsigned four-digit US route designations to them, but this does nothing to establish a transparent link between US highways and the NHS and in general I believe four-digit US routes should be avoided like the plague.)

Of course, there are a fair few NHS routes which are state routes.  This would give a whole new dimension to the "I want my favorite state route to be an Interstate" debate.

There's actually a few that are county routes not maintained by any states. Parham Road in Henrico County, Virginia is in the NHS, and all but a small piece between US 1 (not on the NHS) and I-95 is county-maintained. I presume it's in the NHS because it connects a number of other NHS routes (I-95, US 33, US 250, I-64, VA 150). The piece between I-95 and US 301 doesn't seem to be in the NHS, though. Also, they messed up by labeling the whole thing as VA 73 (that's only from I-95 to US 1, the only VDOT-maintained portion other than a bridge over I-64).

[oscar]

The NHS is a funny system.  It includes not just important through routes which are specialized to serve long-distance traffic, but also what are called "intermodal connectors."  I think a straightforward NHS-to-US highway mapping would run into problems with the intermodal connectors, some of which would have to receive spur designations.  The Interstate numbering system is set up to handle this better than the US highway numbering system, so a map of NHS onto the union of Interstates and US routes would probably work well.  (Froggie--I see your proposal addresses the intermodal connectors by assigning unsigned four-digit US route designations to them, but this does nothing to establish a transparent link between US highways and the NHS and in general I believe four-digit US routes should be avoided like the plague.)

Of course, there are a fair few NHS routes which are state routes.  This would give a whole new dimension to the "I want my favorite state route to be an Interstate" debate.

There's actually a few that are county routes not maintained by any states. Parham Road in Henrico County, Virginia is in the NHS, and all but a small piece between US 1 (not on the NHS) and I-95 is county-maintained. I presume it's in the NHS because it connects a number of other NHS routes (I-95, US 33, US 250, I-64, VA 150). The piece between I-95 and US 301 doesn't seem to be in the NHS, though. Also, they messed up by labeling the whole thing as VA 73 (that's only from I-95 to US 1, the only VDOT-maintained portion other than a bridge over I-64).

Hawaii has one tiny county road in the NHS, unsigned with a five-digit route inventory number (four digits is the usual limit for route numbers, signed or not, in Hawaii).  The only reason for including it in the NHS seems to be that it connects a Fort Shafter Army base entrance to the state highway system. 

There are lots of short intermodal connector roads in the Hawaii state highway system (many unsigned), perhaps because Hawaii DOT also runs most of the state's harbors and airports.  It wouldn't surprise me if they also were in the NHS.

[agentsteel53]

Hawaii has one tiny county road in the NHS, unsigned with a five-digit route inventory number (four digits is the usual limit for route numbers, signed or not, in Hawaii).  The only reason for including it in the NHS seems to be that it connects a Fort Shafter Army base entrance to the state highway system. 

isn't this road not even open to the public?

[Duke87]

Another problem with synching the NHS with US Highways is that there are substantial sections of US Highway that are not currently part of the NHS. You would have to either add those portions to the NHS or reroute/cut them.

[SEWIGuy]

I don't necessarily synch the USH with the NHS, but I think the USH should rise to greater prominence.  For instance, US-53 between La Crosse and Eau Claire, WI for example.  WI-93 is clearly the faster route between these two cities.  WIDOT gives it the "red line" treatment on the map, while US-53 is gray and lies on a more meandering route to the east.

US-53 should be on the more prominent route...especially since north of Eau Claire, US-53 is a prominent four lane highway.  It are these types of gaps that are the problem with the USH numbering.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

Otherwise, go visit your own website Jake.

http://shields.aaroads.com

you go visit it, then 

I have. You've used one of my photos without crediting me.

[agentsteel53]

I have. You've used one of my photos without crediting me.

are you going to tell me which one, or do I have to guess?

[oscar]

Hawaii has one tiny county road in the NHS, unsigned with a five-digit route inventory number (four digits is the usual limit for route numbers, signed or not, in Hawaii).  The only reason for including it in the NHS seems to be that it connects a Fort Shafter Army base entrance to the state highway system. 

isn't this road not even open to the public?

It is open to the general public -- all 0.12 miles of it -- but you have to do a U-turn at the base entrance if you don't have a military ID or other authorization to proceed onto the base.